While it is conceivable that someone could get worked up Bellesiles easily refutable "research" to the point of issueing death threats, I think this is a bogus ploy to demonize the gun culture. If an academician writes a political advocacy book based on deeply flawed research, then attempts to pass it off as a serious academic thesis, what does he expect? Of course he's going to get flamed. About every libertarian, conservative, and gun magazine wrote fairly in-depth refutations of Bellesiles book, and every one I've read wrote unflattering things about his intellectual integrity (not to mention his lack of knowledge about firearms themselves). His feeling must have gotten ruffled by the fact that people outside his ivory tower don't play nice. Ironically enough, I read that John R. Lott, Jr. received death threats for writing his book "More Guns, Less Crime". Given the poor behavior I've seen and read about from the "Million Moms" and other anti-gun bigots like Carl Rowan, I'm not surprised. At 01:47 PM 5/12/01 -0400, Matthew Gaylor wrote: >[Note from Matthew Gaylor: In the course of running a worldwide mailing >list dealing in controversial topics with thousands of subscribers I >routinely get death and other types of threats. My usual response to them >is why wait. Just tell me where you are and we can get this over with- >I'll add a warning that they'd best not miss, as it will be unlikely that >I will. They usually crawl back under the rock they were hiding under. I >did get one fellow banned from using an anonymous sever after he >repeatedly threatened me. The owner of the server did know the address >and we agreed that the best policy was to just ban his address from using >the server thus still protecting his anonymity and my desire not to be >intimidated (Which I wasn't). On another occasion I hosted an online gun >control debate with attorneys John Trentes and Jonathan Wallace. You can >review the debate at http://www.spectacle.org/798/main.html . Jonathan >Wallace, who I respect for taking an advocacy role in defending our first >amendment rights, argued the position of the legitimacy of firearm >regulation. A position that got him, you guessed it, threats. Needless to >say, I don't tolerate threats or even rudeness on Freematt's Alerts, and I >unsubscribed the offending parties. We considered going to the police or >FBI, which is something that I'm ideologically opposed to do, but I would >have if I thought Jonathan's safety was compromised. Online speech, as >many of you know, is different than meat speech. Bravado, flames, and off >the cuff remarks can and do very often get misconstrued. Therefore I do >take with a grain of salt much of what is said quickly and perhaps in >anger. However, you can bet It's still prudent to take precautions...] >Book on America's Gun Culture Has Its Author Watching His Back >By JENNIFER K. RUARK > > >A historian whose recent book challenges the notion that Americans have >always loved their guns has had to arm himself with secrecy after >receiving anonymous threats. > >Michael A. Bellesiles has changed his home telephone number and adopted a >"stealth" e-mail address to avoid vitriolic personal attacks by people >angry about his book Arming America: The Origins of a National Gun Culture >(Alfred A. Knopf, 2000).
